“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job (as president) in this constitutional republic if this body determines your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

Today, a man who has publicly cheated on every one of his three wives told a group of evangelicals that the coming midterm is "a referendum on your religion."

For once, I agree with him! No evangelical of any conscience could ever vote for a man like Trump. He banged a porn star while his wife was at home recovering from childbirth. The coming election absolutely is a referendum on what is acceptably ethical behavior from the US president. Any guesses on how those evangelicals will vote?

“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job (as president) in this constitutional republic if this body determines your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job (as president) in this constitutional republic if this body determines your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

Today, a man who has publicly cheated on every one of his three wives told a group of evangelicals that the coming midterm is "a referendum on your religion."

For once, I agree with him! No evangelical of any conscience could ever vote for a man like Trump. He banged a porn star while his wife was at home recovering from childbirth. The coming election absolutely is a referendum on what is acceptably ethical behavior from the US president. Any guesses on how those evangelicals will vote?

Look, Evangelicals know Trump is bad. But having a Republican President really works well for them. Having a Republican Senate to confirm that President's Christian nominees also works well for them. All of the ridiculous statements are just signalling within their community that this can work for them.

Look, Evangelicals know Trump is bad. But having a Republican President really works well for them. Having a Republican Senate to confirm that President's Christian nominees also works well for them. All of the ridiculous statements are just signalling within their community that this can work for them.

not that I want to go there... but I wonder IF Trump were to win a second term OR when he becomes a lame duck whether he'll just stop giving a rat's ass about the evangelicals completely and instead nominate nothing but corporate/capitalistic regulation-cutter types who could care less about abortion, prayer in school, or curtailing homosexuality. Cause Trump himself doesn't seem to care much on those issues, but does deeply care about making as much money as possible for him and his family. And he's certainly shown a pattern of throwing allies under the bus when they no longer suit him.

My guess is he feels the need to have the evangelical support through 2020, but after that he won't even return their phone calls, whether he's in office or not. Speaking of which, once Trump is out of office I don't imagine the pastors will be calling him up and offering them his prayers either. This is strictly a 'marriage of convenience.'

Well Trump is suggesting that China hacked HRC's emails, despite the conclusions of his own intelligence agencies and extensive reporting on the subject.

Why, oh why can't Trump remain critical of Russia? It's so hard to watch his conduct re: Russia and not conclude that Putin has Trump in his pocket.

Hillary Clinton’s Emails, many of which are Classified Information, got hacked by China. Next move better be by the FBI & DOJ or, after all of their other missteps (Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, FISA, Dirty Dossier etc.), their credibility will be forever gone! (Trump tweet 8/29/2018)

Well Trump is suggesting that China hacked HRC's emails, despite the conclusions of his own intelligence agencies and extensive reporting on the subject.

Why, oh why can't Trump remain critical of Russia? It's so hard to watch his conduct re: Russia and not conclude that Putin has Trump in his pocket.

Hillary Clinton’s Emails, many of which are Classified Information, got hacked by China. Next move better be by the FBI & DOJ or, after all of their other missteps (Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr, FISA, Dirty Dossier etc.), their credibility will be forever gone! (Trump tweet 8/29/2018)

There are only one remove links between Trump and the Russian mafia. There are direct links between Manafort and the Russian mafia. Both are trying to maintain their ill-gotten wealth, but I imagine that a strong (possibly subsidiary) motive in both cases is that crossing Putin and/or the Russian mafia usually results in death or a fate worse than death. Shit-scared and cornered, both of them.

This POS presidency is such a buffet of scandal and lies that the moment you take your eyes off the [unindicted co-conspirator] Cohen issue, you have time to reconsider the fact that Mueller likely has evidence that Trump lied about whether he knew how much trouble Flynn was in when he asked Comey to take it easy in him. The fact that Trump asked Comey this is not in dispute. What Trump has argued is that he didn't know that Flynn had lied to the FBI when he talked to Comey. This goes to the heart of obstruction of justice.

In arguing that the president did not obstruct justice, the president’s attorneys have claimed that President Trump did not understand the serious legal jeopardy that Flynn faced when the president fired Flynn and then spoke the next day to Comey on Flynn’s behalf. That the president had been briefed that the intercepts proved that Flynn and Kislyak discussed sanctions, and other senior White House officials also knew this, undercuts that defense.

And we haven't even gotten to the Russians in Trump tower and the hacked DNC emails and the fact that every cabinet member is looting the treasury for themselves and their friends.

Nonvoters reading this: everything Trump touches turns to shit. He himself usually walks away without a scratch, leaving burning garbage behind him. I'm begging you to make a pledge to vote this year. You can spare 20 minutes to at least say you did what you could. Voters: don't let your friends get away with apathy. Bug them until they register to vote.

“There was no conversation about Michael Flynn,” Giuliani told Jake Tapper on CNN’s State of the Union show on Sunday. “That is what he will testify to if he’s asked that question.”

According to Comey, Trump told him “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go” after he was informed of an FBI investigation into contacts between Trump’s transition team and Russia.

Giuliani’s comments on Sunday appear to contradict a previous appearanceon ABC last month, in which he said Trump did not directly ask Comey to drop the investigation but offered a more nuanced, ‘Can you give him a break?’ that in his experience as a prosecutor “doesn’t determine not going forward”.

I know that they are furiously trying to re-write history, but it sounds like there is a time line of events, including possibly testimony from multiple sources that Trump knew that Flynn was under investigation, that he lied, BEFORE Trump talked to Comey.There is also, of course the whole Trump demanding Comey be personally loyal to him, and when that personal loyalty was not forthcoming firing Comey, that are inconsistent with the story Trump's lawyers are now telling.

Look, Evangelicals know Trump is bad. But having a Republican President really works well for them. Having a Republican Senate to confirm that President's Christian nominees also works well for them. All of the ridiculous statements are just signalling within their community that this can work for them.

not that I want to go there... but I wonder IF Trump were to win a second term OR when he becomes a lame duck whether he'll just stop giving a rat's ass about the evangelicals completely and instead nominate nothing but corporate/capitalistic regulation-cutter types who could care less about abortion, prayer in school, or curtailing homosexuality. Cause Trump himself doesn't seem to care much on those issues, but does deeply care about making as much money as possible for him and his family. And he's certainly shown a pattern of throwing allies under the bus when they no longer suit him.

My guess is he feels the need to have the evangelical support through 2020, but after that he won't even return their phone calls, whether he's in office or not. Speaking of which, once Trump is out of office I don't imagine the pastors will be calling him up and offering them his prayers either. This is strictly a 'marriage of convenience.'

We've had some recent lame duck Presidencies, so let's review:

After Democrats lost the Senate, Mitch McConnell basically refused to acknowledge Obama was even President when Obama put forward a Supreme Court nomination.

After Republicans lost Congress in 2006, GW Bush was basically a lame duck. He lit up the phones on Capitol Hill trying to save immigration reform, and...no one bothered, because he was incredibly unpopular.

Each of these required the President's party to have lost Congress. There's no reason for Trump to act like anything other than Tony Stark while he has majorities in both houses, and the one in the Senate is not in real danger for another 27 months.

Today, a man who has publicly cheated on every one of his three wives told a group of evangelicals that the coming midterm is "a referendum on your religion."

For once, I agree with him! No evangelical of any conscience could ever vote for a man like Trump. He banged a porn star while his wife was at home recovering from childbirth. The coming election absolutely is a referendum on what is acceptably ethical behavior from the US president. Any guesses on how those evangelicals will vote?

Look, Evangelicals know Trump is bad. But having a Republican President really works well for them. Having a Republican Senate to confirm that President's Christian nominees also works well for them. All of the ridiculous statements are just signalling within their community that this can work for them.

Why do people keep talking about this or somehow think something will finally tip the scales as the last straw? It doesn't matter what he does personally, as long as he keeps delivering Supreme Court nominees he will garner their support.

"Today, black evangelicals, adhering to the very same theology as white evangelicals, lean to the left, not the right. " -most confusing statement in the article, yes, it is true, just confusing.

The question that has been asked and never adequately answered is why black evangelicals keep supporting pro abortion democrats? Who cares what the democrats do in their personal lives, it is in the democrat platform and nearly universally accepted by every political Democrat.

The question that has been asked and never adequately answered is why black evangelicals keep supporting pro abortion democrats? Who cares what the democrats do in their personal lives, it is in the democrat platform and nearly universally accepted by every political Democrat.

NYT and Axios are reporting that the National Enquirer had "decades of dirt" on Donald Trump locked in a safe in David Pecker's office, and that in 2016 Cohen and Trump had a plan to buy all damaging information held by the Enquirer and its parent company AMI. These stories cover a variety of topics, including affairs, marital problems and lawsuits against Trump. Reportedly, the stories include detailed notes with sources, photographs and other corroborating evidence.

Pecker is now cooperating with Mueller under a deal that includes partial immunity. Wonder how much of this might come out? And people thought the Starr report was salacious reading!

I remember that Starr report! It came out my freshman year in college, and the cigar incident was...far beyond anything I'd ever been privileged to experience at that point. I should have studied less, and invested more heavily into college dating.

How many white nationalists is too many for all the "I don't care what he says, just what he does" faction of Trump voters? Is there any racist line he can cross that would make you say that this was a disgrace?

Giuliani, brought on to be WH Council as Trump is being investigated for his dealings with foreign governments, has recently entered the spotlight for his own dealings with a foreign government. Writing under the letterhead of his own consulting firm, Guiliani criticized Romanian efforts to crack down on corruption, a statement that has put him at odds with the State Department.

Note to all WH personel: regardless of your reasons, it's probably the best practice to not interact with foreign governments outside your official duties while employed by the US Government. You also do not want to do things which put you at odds with your own executive branch. It shouldn't have to be said, but apparently it does...

Giuliani, brought on to be WH Council as Trump is being investigated for his dealings with foreign governments, has recently entered the spotlight for his own dealings with a foreign government. Writing under the letterhead of his own consulting firm, Guiliani criticized Romanian efforts to crack down on corruption, a statement that has put him at odds with the State Department.

Note to all WH personel: regardless of your reasons, it's probably the best practice to not interact with foreign governments outside your official duties while employed by the US Government. You also do not want to do things which put you at odds with your own executive branch. It shouldn't have to be said, but apparently it does...

These sorts of standards used to be binding, but when leadership fails to enforce standards and creates a flawed ethical climate, it essentially turns into everyone feeling like they need to cash in while they have a window of opportunity. In addition, the kind of person who believes in behaving ethically would not seek a job in this administration because of the stain that will cover those who do.

Besides, Giuliani needs to generate some income now that he's going through another divorce, those things are expensive.

How many white nationalists is too many for all the "I don't care what he says, just what he does" faction of Trump voters? Is there any racist line he can cross that would make you say that this was a disgrace?

No Kyle, it isn't what "the rest of the world has been praying for". From the article you cited, the EU and the UK are trying to encourage Trump NOT to withdraw from the WTO, and to revise/reform rules rather than scrap the WTO entirely. China, Japan and Canada have expressed similar opinions in the last 24 hours. It's also not something that a majority of people int he US support.

Without the participation of all major economies, the WTO becomes largely moot.

More guilty pleas, and more ties of money from Russians illegally flowing into the Trump campaign:

W. Samuel Patten, 47, was charged with one count of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act for failing to register with the Justice Department when he represented a Ukrainian political party known as the Opposition Bloc from 2014 through this year. He has pled guilty in US District Court.

Patten also agreed he had steered an illegal foreign donation to Donald Trump’s inauguration, telling prosecutors that he arranged for an American citizen to act as a “straw donor” to give $50,000 to Trump’s inauguration in place of a Ukrainian businessman who was legally barred from contributing to the event.

Prosecutors with the Justice Department’s national security division and the U.S. attorney’s office in the District contended that Patten formed a company with a Russian national, identified only as “Foreigner A,” to engage in lobbying and political consulting services. Beginning in about 2015, the company received about $1 million for its work advising the Opposition Bloc and members of that party, including a prominent Ukraine oligarch, identified only as “Foreigner B.”

...didn't one of the candidates run under a motto of "drain the swamp"?

Does this count as collusion yet? I mean when a hostile foreign power is literally funding your campaign, doesn't that count? I'm not sure what else we really need to see, but maybe the goalposts have been moved so gradually that the "patriotic" conservative right will find a way to justify this, too?

Does this count as collusion yet? I mean when a hostile foreign power is literally funding your campaign, doesn't that count? I'm not sure what else we really need to see, but maybe the goalposts have been moved so gradually that the "patriotic" conservative right will find a way to justify this, too?

Imagine if the Japanese had funded FDR's campaign after attacking Pearl Harbor. That's kind of the mental space I'm in right now. Like how much more obviously illegal can we possibly get?

It was a bad actor! The Dem’s take questionable money all the time (just don’ t ask who or when...)! It’s just a rule infraction! $50,000 is nothing - not even enough to pay for the balloon-drop at the convention! What’s wrong with a businessman donating money anyway? No collusion, no collusion! Benghazi!!

Does this count as collusion yet? I mean when a hostile foreign power is literally funding your campaign, doesn't that count? I'm not sure what else we really need to see, but maybe the goalposts have been moved so gradually that the "patriotic" conservative right will find a way to justify this, too?

Imagine if the Japanese had funded FDR's campaign after attacking Pearl Harbor. That's kind of the mental space I'm in right now. Like how much more obviously illegal can we possibly get?

It was a bad actor! The Dem’s take questionable money all the time (just don’ t ask who or when...)! It’s just a rule infraction! $50,000 is nothing - not even enough to pay for the balloon-drop at the convention! What’s wrong with a businessman donating money anyway? No collusion, no collusion! Benghazi!!

(How did I do?)

I didn't get bingo. Still have "Crooked Hillary" and "the stockmarket is at an all time high" to cross off the list.

The world. Not the world's governments. The world's governments are as tied to the neoliberal ideology now as the communist world was in the 1950s and 60s - any failure of the approach is taken to mean you just haven't gone hard enough. Privatisation, deregulation and free trade lead to poorer but more expensive services, and cheaper goods but with externalised costs - jobs lost, rivers polluted, workers enslaved in the Third World, a growing rich-poor gap leading to revenue shortages, and so on.

The world's governments in general spend all their time dealing with elites and upper middle class, who are people who benefit from privatisation, deregulation and free trade. It's not a conspiracy, it's just who you spend time with and who reinforces or challenges your ideas. The winners of neoliberalism are those who spend time with members of government and thus most strongly influence policy.

The rest of the population loses out - yes, goods are cheaper, but that's useless if you've lost your job and can't afford them anyway. Given we're in a democracy, the rest of the population will eventually turn around and vote in someone who promises to change all this. Now, of course he won't change it, because he's part of that same elite - but at least he said some nice things to the working and unemployed class, rather than just blaming them for their misfortune as is the normal conservative script, or patting them on the head and offering them a handout as is the normal liberal script. He does at least acknowledge there's a problem: neoliberalism hasn't worked for at least half the population.

The same is true of the EU, but to a lesser extent, because they don't actually engage in free trade, but have massive subsidies and regulatory hurdles in place of tariffs. But they're still seeing a backlash.

As well, the US is a pernicious influence on IP laws worldwide, and uses trade treaties to extend that. Their withdrawal from the TPP benefited Australia and the others immensely in that regard.

Does this count as collusion yet? I mean when a hostile foreign power is literally funding your campaign, doesn't that count? I'm not sure what else we really need to see, but maybe the goalposts have been moved so gradually that the "patriotic" conservative right will find a way to justify this, too?

Imagine if the Japanese had funded FDR's campaign after attacking Pearl Harbor. That's kind of the mental space I'm in right now. Like how much more obviously illegal can we possibly get?

It was a bad actor! The Dem’s take questionable money all the time (just don’ t ask who or when...)! It’s just a rule infraction! $50,000 is nothing - not even enough to pay for the balloon-drop at the convention! What’s wrong with a businessman donating money anyway? No collusion, no collusion! Benghazi!!

(How did I do?)

I didn't get bingo. Still have "Crooked Hillary" and "the stockmarket is at an all time high" to cross off the list.

I'm missing "I deserve an A+ on Puerto Rico", "There was blame on both sides", and "Kim trusts me and I trust him"... I guess I'm never going to win!

The world. Not the world's governments. The world's governments are as tied to the neoliberal ideology now as the communist world was in the 1950s and 60s - any failure of the approach is taken to mean you just haven't gone hard enough. Privatisation, deregulation and free trade lead to poorer but more expensive services, and cheaper goods but with externalised costs - jobs lost, rivers polluted, workers enslaved in the Third World, a growing rich-poor gap leading to revenue shortages, and so on.

The world's governments in general spend all their time dealing with elites and upper middle class, who are people who benefit from privatisation, deregulation and free trade. It's not a conspiracy, it's just who you spend time with and who reinforces or challenges your ideas. The winners of neoliberalism are those who spend time with members of government and thus most strongly influence policy.

The rest of the population loses out - yes, goods are cheaper, but that's useless if you've lost your job and can't afford them anyway. Given we're in a democracy, the rest of the population will eventually turn around and vote in someone who promises to change all this. Now, of course he won't change it, because he's part of that same elite - but at least he said some nice things to the working and unemployed class, rather than just blaming them for their misfortune as is the normal conservative script, or patting them on the head and offering them a handout as is the normal liberal script. He does at least acknowledge there's a problem: neoliberalism hasn't worked for at least half the population.

The same is true of the EU, but to a lesser extent, because they don't actually engage in free trade, but have massive subsidies and regulatory hurdles in place of tariffs. But they're still seeing a backlash.

As well, the US is a pernicious influence on IP laws worldwide, and uses trade treaties to extend that. Their withdrawal from the TPP benefited Australia and the others immensely in that regard.

It's an interesting assertion that you are making - that a collection of democratically elected governments support inclusion of the US in the WTO while their populace does not. Do you have any sources or data to back up this claim?

My guess is, if you asked people the world over about this issue the majority response would be "don't know/what's the WTO?" I don't think people give it much thought, nor can most give even a rudimentary explanation about what the WTO does or what teh conflicts are. So what does that say about the detractors vs the people who are steeped in international trade issues who overwhelmingly want the WTO to continue more-or-less along its path?

Does this count as collusion yet? I mean when a hostile foreign power is literally funding your campaign, doesn't that count? I'm not sure what else we really need to see, but maybe the goalposts have been moved so gradually that the "patriotic" conservative right will find a way to justify this, too?

Imagine if the Japanese had funded FDR's campaign after attacking Pearl Harbor. That's kind of the mental space I'm in right now. Like how much more obviously illegal can we possibly get?

It was a bad actor! The Dem’s take questionable money all the time (just don’ t ask who or when...)! It’s just a rule infraction! $50,000 is nothing - not even enough to pay for the balloon-drop at the convention! What’s wrong with a businessman donating money anyway? No collusion, no collusion! Benghazi!!

(How did I do?)

I didn't get bingo. Still have "Crooked Hillary" and "the stockmarket is at an all time high" to cross off the list.

I'm missing "I deserve an A+ on Puerto Rico", "There was blame on both sides", and "Kim trusts me and I trust him"... I guess I'm never going to win!

Puerto Rico was tough because it's an "island surrounded by water, big water, ocean water." Perhaps we should give him an A+ for knowing an island is surrounded by water.

I'll get full on hate from this board but I don't think Trump is all that bad. There's a lot of negativity, so I don't need to repeat in full. So trying to be objective and unbiased, these are some of my thoughts.

Scott Gottlieb/FDA have surprisingly exceeded expectations. Trump, more like Democrats and less Republicans, has targeted drug pricing. A new Office of Biosimilars was announced and FDA is doing more work to get generics approve, widen the marketplace, and deal with shortages with the limited authority it has. Even Azar is trying to import foreign biosimilars (completely against Trump's trade policies but supportive of his drug pricing agenda) to drive prices down. Even liberals are surprised, and I think Trump has a pretty unorthodox stance on this for his party.

Illegal immigration: I'm not in complete agreement with his rhetoric but he's the only one on this issue that liberals and conservatives find common ground. Immigration is a social bargain. When you immigrate, you're expected to adopt the country's values, swear an oath, and be a contributing, productive member of society. Illegals don't do any of these. This is the key reason why they will never flourish in America. Looking at foreign educated immigrants they do quite well (Silicon Valley, etc). But illegals do not or cannot. They have middle school education, no skills, no willingness to improve their mind. That's why after Tibbetts murder, guy still needed a translator. 8 years, still can't speak English. How can he and millions of illegals ever expect to flourish in America and move up to a middle class life? They simply can't.

I know America accepted poor and hungry, but America hundred years ago is not the same as now. America today is an advanced economy, not a country still in expansion and behind Europe in scientific prowess. We're in a different stage of development, it's reasonable to have different level of immigrants come in. See Germany, Sweden, South Korea (Jeju Island/Yemen refugees), Canada, Australia, etc. All very liberal countries but tougher immigration policies than US with more overt racism.

I don't agree with all of Reihan's views or his facial expressions, but he made a lot of valid points.

Trade: Clinton himself in a recent interview said NAFTA should be renegotiated on PBS as the economies 28 years ago is different than now and should be adjusted for. Terms and conditions change with time. Treaties don't and shouldn't stay in existence forever. Trump's approach isn't easy to follow but sometimes it does make sense. The recent pact with Mexico is more about sending a stronger signal to China and creating a North American bloc with $16/hour, origin, and the message to China, right to collectively bargain and intellectual property, a sign of what Trump is looking for in trade with China. His tough stance on China is also necessary imo.

NATO: Does it make sense for us taxpayers to spend so much on European security and NATO? Judging by their lack of commitment in spending for common defense, they don't seem all the interested from their budgets and they are mooching of our backs. Especially Germany and their pipeline, which has been attacked by others in Europe too. Greece even pays their share, GREECE and not GERMANY?! I get their feud with Turkey but still...Europe is also changed, Soviet is gone, Germany is united and developed and largely liberal still. NATO's mission is different now, and US should not be world security officer, the world should be world security officer and Europe should do more.

Trump does things even liberals like, but gets heat regardless. Voters don't always care about the message, but the messenger, and how you say, not what you say. I abstained from 2016 election but if I could vote, I'd vote for Trump if Hillary was opponent. If someone else not Hillary, maybe my vote would change too.

I'm not white either. I actually like Obama and I like Trump, is that weird? They both ran on the same message against Hillary actually "Drain the swamp" "Yes We Can", they ran as outsiders against the establishment. If anything, it shows how much in common Trump and Obama voters have in their frustration against Washington doesn't it?

1. FDA pick - I agree though I'd say this was accidental. You nominate dozens of people, I guess at least one of them isn't going to be bad. Is that like how Tillerson helped prevent WWIII despite Trump's best efforts to start it?

2. ImmigrationYou don't seem to have a realistic idea of what illegal immigrants are like at all. I suggest you read more on this. Just about everything you said about them is wrong. I don't think you'll get much backlash saying that we need better immigration standards, but Trump has been worse in every way on this than Obama.

3. TradeTrump is terrible at negotiating, so I doubt anything positive will happen from this. He's a baby with a gun, so people will do what he wants but no one will talk with him seriously. Anything good that comes out of trade will be because of the people around Trump doing things right despite Trump.

4. NATOEveryone agrees here that America's military is too big, but start asking which bases to take away and suddenly things get tougher. Europe cannot check Russia's power, Europe has no incentive to check Korea's or China's power. We're the world's baby sitter because we have to be. Because it's in our best interest to be. We get to call all the shots. We were the only country that wasn't completely decimated from WWII. No one wants to start a war with us, and Europe will never elicit that fear that we do.

1. FDA pick - I agree though I'd say this was accidental. You nominate dozens of people, I guess at least one of them isn't going to be bad. Is that like how Tillerson helped prevent WWIII despite Trump's best efforts to start it?

2. ImmigrationYou don't seem to have a realistic idea of what illegal immigrants are like at all. I suggest you read more on this. Just about everything you said about them is wrong. I don't think you'll get much backlash saying that we need better immigration standards, but Trump has been worse in every way on this than Obama.

3. TradeTrump is terrible at negotiating, so I doubt anything positive will happen from this. He's a baby with a gun, so people will do what he wants but no one will talk with him seriously. Anything good that comes out of trade will be because of the people around Trump doing things right despite Trump.

4. NATOEveryone agrees here that America's military is too big, but start asking which bases to take away and suddenly things get tougher. Europe cannot check Russia's power, Europe has no incentive to check Korea's or China's power. We're the world's baby sitter because we have to be. Because it's in our best interest to be. We get to call all the shots. We were the only country that wasn't completely decimated from WWII. No one wants to start a war with us, and Europe will never elicit that fear that we do.

It's not just 4 things, I only picked a few, there's plenty of positive and negative things he's done. Have you had a president you've been 100% on board with?

Not just FDA, but Mattis has been accepted as a wise pick by the left. The others are mostly inconsequential. His nominees haven't done too much of anything or were forced to resign. Gottlieb was a surprise. The government still is functioning and majority have been quiet. Trump just steals all the attention (probably what he wants anyway) Certain departments are apolitical compared to others like defense, transportation, labor, NIH (Francis Collins is still there doing great work, holdover from Obama)

I have an idea of what illegal immigrants are like since we've hired them before. If we want to complain about illegals, we have to accept we'll be doing work Americans don't want or are too lazy to do (meatpacking, food processing, mowing lawns, construction, etc). To me, their modern day slaves being exploited by employers going unpunished. Americans can't have their cake and eat it. If we want illegals doing menial work, at least a program to give work visas, track, document them, to protect worker rights but no path to citizenship as that's not their goal and they lack the skills to succeed in America (largely, there are always exceptions). They just want to send remittances. Once Trump threatened, only then they wanted citizenship, but not out of patriotism but pragmatism. When you hear Mexicans chant "bin Laden at US Soccer games, it's hard to think of them as a people on our side. One woman openly admitted how they exploit children to gain sympathy (separation was bad move yes but never saw such irresponsible parents). But that goes towards immigration issue as a whole and integrating immigrants, not just accepting them. Many factors out of our control(like technology) contribute to the divide. Illegals are not all net benefit. Many need to be deported but those deemed necessary should have some permit to work.

What does it mean to be a citizen? Objectively but also in people's minds, what do people think of citizenship? Native born? Loyalty? Race? Language? What holds a nation together? Not just in US but every country is wrestling with that identity. That's why Europe is disintegrating, Merkel got too cocky and stayed in power too long, wanting to be the savior and hero but end up losing Britain and EU and her coalition. Feel good about yourself for a few days, then let country feel like crap for years if not generations? Not so wise and not sure we should rush into accepting anyone walking into the country, we have standards and laws and ports of entry. Immigration is for another thread anyway.

Obama said not to underestimate Trump. Hard to say his negotiation as results aren't final but it's actually not bad. North Korea was actually pretty good. He got war dead remains and hostages back and they blew up their (now meaningless) testing site. For what? Just to meet? NK still has sanctions and they've stopped testing (mainly cause they don't need to) but the tension is gone isn't it? And Trump always wanted to pull out of ROK and save $$, so he doesn't see that as a loss and it kinda isn't, we can easily restart those if we want. If you're going to be unpredictable, make as much use of it as you can (though Trump's effectiveness is questionable).

Europe can plenty check Russia's power. EU GDP is multiple times larger than Russia. They have capable defense industry. They're plenty able to defend themselves now. EU does have interest on checking China (Britain/France sending their navies to SCS, Hague ruling). Collective world security requires collective world effort. Most NATO members aren't committed, choosing to mooch off us while we bear the burden. It's not post-WWII anymore, Europe is not destroyed, why keep the same economic tariffs, agreements, military arrangements based on a destroyed Europe for today's EU? Macron said they can't rely on US anymore, good, he has to pick up the slack too. If they join Russia that's fine too. But Lockheed, Boeing, NG, and deep state won't let America leave EU, just like they did to Carter and Korea and now to Trump.

And Russia's moves are very rational. We've been picking off former Soviet satellites and are now at Russia's doorstep. How would US feel if Mexico was aligned with Russia with Russian troops doing exercises near Texas border? I can't blame them. And I understand China's rationale for SCS even though I completely disagree and oppose them, they have my sympathy.

I expect the media to do its best to make the Trump presidency a big a headache as possible. I don't think there's collusion, if there was, it would've been found already. If all they found was campaign finance violations, then there's nothing left but yellow journalism. Russia/Trump may have similar intents but doesn't mean they colluded, though they probably understood each other without having to say anything. I just wish the media could remove its bias and shut up, talk about something else. Americans voted for Trump, it wasn't fixed, just cause it's shocking doesn't mean it can't be true. Democrats should focus on building a better message and actually do something instead of whining. Also I hate Fox, Breitbart and regularly read NYT, WSJ, SCMP, thediplomat, Guardian, PBS (watch) and Wikipedia but the media is really wearing me down.

I don't think there's collusion, if there was, it would've been found already. If all they found was campaign finance violations, then there's nothing left but yellow journalism.

I don't think you understand what collusion means.

A hostile foreign power actively worked with the Trump campaign to get Trump elected. They gave him money. They bought ads. They hacked his opponents. Saying this is just campaign finance violations is like saying drive-by murder is a firearms offense.

I don't think there's collusion, if there was, it would've been found already. If all they found was campaign finance violations, then there's nothing left but yellow journalism.

I don't think you understand what collusion means.

A hostile foreign power actively worked with the Trump campaign to get Trump elected. They gave him money. They bought ads. They hacked his opponents. Saying this is just campaign finance violations is like saying drive-by murder is a firearms offense.

If I'm not mistaken, there's still no evidence Trump himself directly colluded (yet technically) and if campaign did so in a coordinated way with the Kremlin. The evidence could point to his campaign, but not Trump himself. Chris Christie wasn't convicted for Bridgegate, but he helped set the tone for his advisers to go out of their way to help him. May have been similar for Trump. Could be more "stand alone complex" than collusion. "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?"

When Mueller brings the charges, then I'll start believing it. It's proof of burden is on the prosecutor no?

To me though, collusion isn't the biggest problem. The hacks showed the lack of integrity in the Democratic primaries and our election process overall, which should be the discussion no one is having. That Russia in a perverse situation is also preserving American civil liberties by telling us the truth and by keeping Snowden away from US gov't, who told us the reaches of illegal surveillance, to me, is frankly humiliating and embarassing that it took illegal acts to see how ugly and vulnerable to outsiders our democracy is. That and our gullibility to media brainwashing on left and right scares me. To be fair, America has a history of supporting/overthrowing rulers of other countries so this is karma on us in a way...we got a taste of our own medicine

And impeaching Trump isn't going to solve problems, it could exacerbate current divisions. Even if it ends up being legally right to impeach, his voters are could very well go nuts. And behind Trump is someone worse, Pence.

Let's also look at Trump's actions. He gave tactical command to the US military, which allowed them to flexibly and rapidly respond to massacring 200 Russian mercenaries in Syria. Sanctions are in effect and increasing. Weapons are being sold to Ukraine. Despite NATO rhetoric, he might move troops to Poland and he signed NATO memoranda. I try to look at the actions and end result, not his words too much. Russia's languishing economy will hurt their demographics and own people pushed back on Putin over pension reform. Doesn't look like Russia got what it wanted. That's the beauty of the presidency, captain of a large ship with small rudder.

So many here don't like him. I don't like his character but I accept it and try to be an optimist. Everyone is free to vote though half didn't. Vote in 2020 if you don't like him. Move to battleground states (real structural demographic change to Middle America would help Dems) and bring real good policy and compelling vision and message for people. Hillary didn't do that, she got complacent, overconfident, and failed.

So many here don't like him. I don't like his character but I accept it and try to be an optimist.

So you've heard his rhetoric and you've decided you're okay with that. So you're okay with a man who says nazi's are good people, Russia is okay, cheating on your many wives is okay, paying for porn stars/Playboy models for having sex with you while married is okay, lying daily is okay...

I assume many of you follow Seth Abramson on twitter and have seen that he has a book coming out soon. In case anyone else wants the (amazon) link, here it is: [urlhttps://www.amazon.com/Proof-Collusion-Trump-Betrayed-America-ebook/dp/B07GZ4MR77/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1535892243&sr=8-9&keywords=seth+abramson]Proof of Collusion, How Trump Betrayed America[/url]

2. ImmigrationYou don't seem to have a realistic idea of what illegal immigrants are like at all. I suggest you read more on this.

I have to agree with this. You give the impression that the only illegal immigrants are those coming from Mexico/south America (or maybe you mean any country speaking a different language? Not too clear exactly) but there are hundreds of thousands, for example, from Ireland, too. Well-educated, English-speaking and yet still illegal immigrants.

Most NATO members aren't committed, choosing to mooch off us while we bear the burden. It's not post-WWII anymore, Europe is not destroyed, why keep the same economic tariffs, agreements, military arrangements based on a destroyed Europe for today's EU? Macron said they can't rely on US anymore, good, he has to pick up the slack too. If they join Russia that's fine too. But Lockheed, Boeing, NG, and deep state won't let America leave EU, just like they did to Carter and Korea and now to Trump.

An agreement was made by NATO countries in 2014 to increase defense spending to 2% of GDP by 2024.

So many here don't like him. I don't like his character but I accept it and try to be an optimist.

So you've heard his rhetoric and you've decided you're okay with that. So you're okay with a man who says nazi's are good people, Russia is okay, cheating on your many wives is okay, paying for porn stars/Playboy models for having sex with you while married is okay, lying daily is okay...

I have an idea of what illegal immigrants are like since we've hired them before. If we want to complain about illegals, we have to accept we'll be doing work Americans don't want or are too lazy to do (meatpacking, food processing, mowing lawns, construction, etc). To me, their modern day slaves being exploited by employers going unpunished. Americans can't have their cake and eat it. If we want illegals doing menial work, at least a program to give work visas, track, document them, to protect worker rights but no path to citizenship as that's not their goal and they lack the skills to succeed in America (largely, there are always exceptions).

Yes, we need a huge work visa program because, obviously, they're already here and they're already working. This will increase costs (and it's why anti-immigrant politicians are often caught having an illegal nanny -- they're trying to save the money it would take to pay a real wage). Are we ready to accept that? Are business owners and their paid-for politicians ready to accept that?

Re: lacking the skills needed to succeed, they're working, spending money, and sending money home. How are they not succeeding? They want to work and we need them to work.

To me though, collusion isn't the biggest problem. The hacks showed the lack of integrity in the Democratic primaries and our election process overall, which should be the discussion no one is having. That Russia in a perverse situation is also preserving American civil liberties by telling us the truth and by keeping Snowden away from US gov't, who told us the reaches of illegal surveillance, to me, is frankly humiliating and embarassing that it took illegal acts to see how ugly and vulnerable to outsiders our democracy is. That and our gullibility to media brainwashing on left and right scares me. To be fair, America has a history of supporting/overthrowing rulers of other countries so this is karma on us in a way...we got a taste of our own medicine

I think what it actually showed was the general populace's lack of understanding of our election process.

@astvilla I won’t go through your posts point by point because it would take too much time. Here are a few things in no particular order.1. I’ve spent a lot of time working with immigrants and their children. They are hard working people in my experience making rational economic decisions. I think they should be treated better and our immigration system does need reform. But, let’s be very clear about Trump’s actions. His policy is basically to make things so bad for immigrants that they won’t want to come. The inhumanity of it is a defining feature, not an oversight. This is Stephen Miller writ large. Saying the parents are irresponsible based on an anecdote is incredibly callous. You should be ashamed.

2. What do you thing of cabinet picks such as Pruitt (now gone and replaced with a coal executive)? His tenure was an unmitigated disaster, and that’s before you even get to his ethical transgressions that ultimately got him out. De Vos is the exact opposite of draining the swamp. Mulvaney as head of CFPB? He literally asked for no budget.

3. Lost in the string of disasters are the setbacks to addressing climate change. This should not be a partisan issue, but it sadly is. The impacts to future generations of delay now are very real and our responsibility.

4. The Cohen guilty plea literally directly implicated Trump in campaign finance cover up related to preventing information from coming out that would lose him votes.

5. Trump is very eager to privatize the VA. This should not happen. There are currently programs in place to allow vets to use local doctors for some services when distance is a problem The fact of the matter is that the VA has skills and resources that are specific to injuries and health care needs of vets. Bleeding resources away from the VA will do a disservice to vets. What the VA actually needs is administrative reform.